narutofandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Akatsuki
Target on most of the members teams it has Kurama listed as a target; thats not technically true; only Itachi and Nagato were ever canonically assigned to capture Naruto. I do believe it was simply the others chose to go after naruto because he was in the area (Deidara, Sasori, Hidan, etc.) Is it alright if i remove Kurama from the other teams targets?--RexGodwin (talk) 04:40, May 4, 2013 (UTC) :But they targeted him. Well not Hidan and Kakuzu, but, Sasori and Deidara did. This was something Deidara went as far as to apologise to Itachi for beforehand.--Cerez365™ (talk) 14:33, May 4, 2013 (UTC) No, Hidan and kauzu did too; they said they were going to Konoha to find Naruto. Besides, they weren't officially assigned to capture him, it was just Sasori and Deidara's choice to get him since he was there.--RexGodwin (talk) 03:21, May 5, 2013 (UTC) Member Status and Additional Column Konan is dead, can I change her status to deceased? Also, I remember before there was a column that listed which particular ninja killed/incapacitated the member, i.e. Nara Shikamaru for Hidan. Why was that taken down? --Littlemissdoodle (talk) 23:46, May 21, 2013 (UTC) :See here for why konan isn't added. Also, I don't recall the killer list on this page, but we do have that on the Plot page. — SimAnt 23:55, May 21, 2013 (UTC) ::Got it, thanks. Well now, that was analyzed down to the intricacies. Saw the plot page too but that's not it. I distinctly remember the additional column, either way I'll sort through the archives / other pages. Maybe there was a prior discussion that merited its removal. --Littlemissdoodle (talk) 00:12, May 22, 2013 (UTC) Kumogakure & Akatsuki I came across this line on the page and couldn't help but think it was a little off for some reason. "The Fourth Raikage claims that only Kumogakure has never used Akatsuki's services" Is this accurate? From what I understood, during the Kage Summit, the Raikage said that Kumogakure never produced any missing-nin that joined Akatsuki, not that they had never used it's services before. I draw this conclusion based on the fact that there are no current or former Cloud ninja aligned with Akatsuki and that it seems unlikely that Konoha would use Akatsuki's "services" after their reformation prior to the third shinobi world war, considering Pain's goals would have been to destroy Konoha and capture the Nine Tails. Please correct me if I'm wrong, I don't have that particular episode in front of me so I'm not sure if that statement is wrong or if it was simply mistranslated. Furbag (talk) 05:05, July 22, 2013 (UTC) this might have been discussed already, but... Shouldn't Taka be treated as members instead of an associated group? They were even given cloaks, something only Akatsuki members wear. It was very brief, but it was nonetheless--Elveonora (talk) 19:34, August 5, 2013 (UTC) :It has been discussed before somewhere. They're not considered members because they never wore the rings. It goes back to Tobi getting into the group after recovering Sasori's ring and taking his spot. Omnibender - Talk - 20:02, August 5, 2013 (UTC) ::Oh right, not just cloaks, forgot the rings need to be worn as a sort of membership recognition as well. Most of them are no longer available tho :) * Deidara's = gone in a suicidal explosion * Hidan's = decomposed by earth * Kisame's = made sharks' feces * Kakuzu's = turned into gunpowder with wind-powered grinder * Konan's = rusted by water * Orochimaru's = rotten; not recommended for further use due to odor and bacteria being present... also who knows where that guy sticked his fingers * Nagato's = should be in Obito's possession * Sasori's = still on Obito's finger? Haven't noticed, since his face alone occupies my attention * Itachi's = should be in Obito's possession; blood present, possible risk of STD * Zetsu's = burnt by magical eyes/cut by shark sword or just thrown away See? 2 rings just simply wouldn't do for 3 members ;D--Elveonora (talk) 17:27, August 6, 2013 (UTC) We don't really know how the rings worked, or what they were made of. Just because most are unavailable, doesn't mean they've been destroyed. Their purpose seemed to be related to the sealing of the tailed beasts, but that was never explained in detail. We'll either never hear from them again (most likely), or there will be a WTF plot twist in which they'll be recovered, revealed to be relics from or related to the Sage of the Six Paths and the splitting of the Ten-Tails, and required to do something about the Ten-Tails. You heard it here first, and I did call the Second Mizukage being a Hōzuki before anyone else here. Kishimoto took 400+ chapters to reveal the Zabuza's sword had a power, and we're about the same chapter distance since the rings were introduced. Omnibender - Talk - 18:21, August 6, 2013 (UTC) Likin' your enthusiasm about something as minor. For your sake I hope those don't turn to be just costume jewelry. But a nice theory nonetheless, will be sure to credit you on all known forums in case it comes to pass ;D--Elveonora (talk) 19:08, August 6, 2013 (UTC) :I was joking up there. I have no expectation that the rings will ever be relevant, let alone mentioned or shown again. But please, do credit me if my some miracle if it ever does come to pass. Omnibender - Talk - 19:52, August 6, 2013 (UTC) Deidara and Tobi The article states that "After Deidara's death, Tobi revealed his true personality and began to actively work to his own goals." While this statement is technically true, it seems to imply that Deidara had no idea who Tobi was. But we don't know that for sure. For all we know Deidara was just playing along when Tobi was acting "childish". He surely witnessed Tobi subduing Isobu without a struggle. Didn't show any hint of surprise and just went on one of his rants about art. The way I see it, even if he didn't know about Obito and stuff, he atleast knew it was Madara or some other Uchiha with a freakin powerful Sharingan. There's also the part when Tobi tells Kisame "Sorry you're the last to know" or something like that. Which could very well mean that all the other Akatsuki members knew he was much more than the "childish" personality he played on-screen, including Deidara.--Karunyan (talk) 02:58, October 11, 2013 (UTC) Nothing in the manga implies Deidara did know Tobi's identify, so neither should we. If he had known Tobi had a Sharingan, he'd have ranted about it, since he sees those that possess the Sharingan as having no respect for his art. Deidara and many others were already dead or no longer part of Akatsuki when he told Kisame that, they didn't count or matter any more. Tobi meant of the people still involved. Omnibender - Talk - 15:45, October 11, 2013 (UTC) Road to Ninja When was it implied that Itachi was the leader of the Genjutsu Akatsuki???? there was nothing to really show that, that's just a fan speculation that's better off removed--Deathmailrock (talk) 22:58, November 23, 2013 (UTC) :He certainly looked like the leader. This might come from some press release about the movie. Omnibender - Talk - 00:53, November 24, 2013 (UTC) Inactive? We know that Obito's defected, but should we consider the same for Black Zetsu and the White Zetsu clones? Madara was never technically a part of the organization and they returned to his side. Same plan, different organization, in this case it's Madara himself with his personal goal, not acting under Akatsuki. --Mandon (talk) 00:28, December 15, 2013 (UTC) hmmmm, I'd like to say that Madara is in full control of the organization and Black Zetsu as the only member along with the white zetsu army surviving since they are still fighting after Obito's defection. Madara is one of Akatsuki's founders and the true real mastermind in its current incarnation even though he didn't live to see it's formation and that he left Obito to do it by encouraging Yahiko. Akatsuki doesn't have a common goal but with members with different goal as stated in wiki as of now so having Madara's personal goal added wouldn't be a problem but we still have to confirm it if we agree and that we'll see once the story shows it. --Masurao14 (talk) 00:28, December 15, 2013 (UTC) Madara's affiliation with Akatsuki I just want to make some contributions regarding Madara's affiliation with Akatsuki and I know it's not confirmed if Madara is the founder of Akatsuki's current incarnation since he influenced Yahiko in it's creation but it would make him a spiritual founder since he passed it on to Obito and Nagato. Yahiko is the founder of Akatsuki but the Akatsuki right now is founded by Obito and Nagato as well whom Obito in the first place was influenced by Madara. Speaking of which, Madara needs to have Akatsuki affiliation because Kabuto has one already since he came back before his defeat as an associate. It's okay if Madara is an associate but he could be considered as a leader right now since Obito defected and that he is a spiritual founder from the start. --Masurao14 (talk) 22:11, December 18, 2013 (UTC) Obito and Zetsu Looking over their history together throughout the times in Akatsuki and beyond, I really don't think it's too farfetched to classify them as partners. Zetsu is basically the Konan to Obito's Nagato. A chapter cover even called Zetsu Tobi's assistant. I mean they weren't officially partners as far as Tobi/Deidara, Itachi/Kisame and the like, but Obito and Madara weren't technically either, now were they?--RexGodwin (talk) 21:47, January 23, 2014 (UTC) Goals I may have started this discussion a long time ago and got no responses. Shouldn't this be changed up? Having Yahiko's goal as the Original Goal, Nagato's as the Main Goal, and then just Obito's Goal? Also, I find Itachi's goal unneeded since that section is about the goals of the leaders. --OmegaRasengan (talk) 06:43, January 25, 2014 (UTC) :Nagato's true goal differed from what he explained to Hidan. Not sure if the cover-up should count as the "main goal" though.--BeyondRed (talk) 07:12, January 25, 2014 (UTC) Obito's Akatsuki The main image should be labeled as "Obito's Akatsuki" rather than "Nagato's Akatsuki" as Obito was the group's true leader and mastermind after Yahiko's death. Nagato was merely a proxy leader and as such, it would be incorrect to claim Akatsuki as his. Kenny U (talk) 21:18, February 19, 2014 (UTC)Kenny U :While technically true, Tobi was not the recognized leader of Akatsuki. In fact he never was. He pulled the strings and had Pain do what he wanted, but he was never the official leader.--[[User:TheUltimate3|'TheUltimate3']] (talk) 22:47, February 19, 2014 (UTC) He was recognized as leader by Nagato and Konan themselves and Zetsu as well, and after Nagato's demise Kisame recognized him as the one who was truly the leader. Kenny U (talk) 00:42, February 20, 2014 (UTC)KennyU But Nagato was still the leader as far as day-to-day activities were concerned, everyone else answered to him. Nagato is the CEO. Omnibender - Talk - 00:49, February 20, 2014 (UTC) The others answers to Nagato, but Nagato answered to Obito. I would say that makes Obito the leader wouldn't you say? I'm fairly certain that there are times where Nagato literally addresses Obito as "Leader". Kenny U (talk) 00:53, February 20, 2014 (UTC)Kenny U :Nagato never called Tobi Leader. In fact, right before sending Pain to get the Nine-Tails, Tobi said something along the lines "Do this, you are the Akatsuki Leader after all" or something to that effect. Basically, while Obito was running the show, Obito only really manipulated Nagato. Nagato was still the official leader of Akatsuki.--[[User:TheUltimate3|'TheUltimate3']] (talk) 12:39, February 20, 2014 (UTC) Nagato Why is Nagato listed as "Defected"? He is clearly dead, or why would he be reincarnated during the war? I would edit it myself but Jacce protected the page. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page | My Image Uploads | Tabber Code | Channel 17:36, July 4, 2014 (UTC) :Because he defected from Akatsuki before he died. • Seelentau 愛 議 17:46, July 4, 2014 (UTC) ::Isn't he technically both? In a way, saying he's "defected" makes him sound like he is still alive, but he isn't. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page | My Image Uploads | Tabber Code | Channel 17:51, July 4, 2014 (UTC) :::While yes he is technically both, as far as Akatsuki is concerned, he defected and is no longer their problem. Same reason why Konan and Orochimaru are listed as "Defected".--[[User:TheUltimate3|'TheUltimate3']] (talk) 18:39, July 4, 2014 (UTC) its as simple as... did he die loyal like Sasori, Kakuzu, Deidara, Kisame, Hidan (techicality), and White Zetsu? Nope. Same as Konan, Orochimaru, and Obito who renounced Akatsuki before their deaths.--RexGodwin (talk) 13:55, July 7, 2014 (UTC) True founder Okay... so who is it? We have: * Black Zetsu stating himself to have made Akatsuki * Obito telling Konan it was himself, Uchiha Madara who persuaded Yahiko to do it * Yahiko What I'm asking is if Black Zetsu influenced Madara/Obito who in turn influenced Yahiko or if it was Yahiko's original idea. Because if the former, isn't Black Zetsu technically the true founder and leader of Akatsuki?--Elveonora (talk) 11:19, July 29, 2014 (UTC) :Sewing the seeds and laying groundwork just means you sewed the seeds and laid the groundwork. So, Yahiko is in fact the original founder of Akatsuki. If he got the idea to do so from Tobi who in turn got it from Madara who in turn got it from Black Zetsu, then prime, Yahiko is still the actual founder.--[[User:TheUltimate3|'TheUltimate3']] (talk) 11:37, July 29, 2014 (UTC) Image hows this for the recent iteration of Akatsuki? we can clearly see all members. --RexGodwin (talk) 20:11, August 15, 2014 (UTC) :I don't know if our eyes are different, but I clearly can't see crap. I can make them out because well, we know who they are, but their bodies are blocked by shadow and a overpowering sun.--[[User:TheUltimate3|'TheUltimate3']] (talk) 20:21, August 15, 2014 (UTC) ::You can't see crap in that image, just a bunch of bodies. If you find a meaningful image that shows all of the Akatsuki clearly, then go ahead and suggest it: otherwise, it's staying. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page | My Image Uploads | Tabber Code | Channel 21:06, August 15, 2014 (UTC) well i was thinking more of putting it in the article somewhere, not necessarily as the infobox pic. :P--RexGodwin (talk) 00:28, August 16, 2014 (UTC)